Montgomery development news

[Brown Duckz]

I'm really up in arms on this issue... I don't quite understand the term suburban office building? Is it the design? Like there won't be a public entrance on the street level or something? What makes this a suburban office building, but the Renaissance hotel not a suburban hotel? Also.. it's no where near the final stages of planning. I'm sure there is time and room for improvement and/or change.

[hiijakd]

suburban is the same for both in how they interact with the streetscape. people want to walk past things that intrigue them like shops, restaurants, etc. the hotel doesn't really meet those criteria either, but it is too late to do much about it now. i heard in early conversations that the first floor of the parking deck there will have some rentable retail space but i am not sure that those weren't just rumors.
i hope you are right that this is just early in the planning stage but i think they are further into the development than we all realize and if there is not more outcry from the public we will lose even more of the city we love.

if this board is truly about redevelopment and the success of downtown then it is time to make our voices heard and stop "bad planning" like this.

[Chad Emerson]

Both the proposed RSA Judicial Building project and the new hotel (like the Embassy Suites and RSA/Regions Bank building) are all suburban in the way the interact with the street.

Look at the images of successful downtowns. Whether it is King St. in Charleston, Madison Avenue in Manhattan or King in Alexandria, Virginia or almost any other.

They all share something in common: the way that their lowest floors interact with the sidewalk and street frontage. In each case, they have clear window, doors directly onto the sidewalk, street level uses that operate past 5pm, and very, very shallow (and often zero) setbacks.

In fact, you can find the same thing on lower Dexter and, for that matter, on most of Dexter and Commerce in historical pictures.

The lower floors of the buildings are designed to facilitate pedestrian traffic first. Plenty of street level lighting, windows, and awnings/arcades/galleries that cover the walk. Plus, street level uses that stay open past the time offices typically close at 5pm.

In the case of the RSA project, it does very little to foster a pedestrian-friendly environment. Other than the front door, very few windows and no ground floor "after 5pm" use.

Again, these are not theoretical concerns. They have been proven over and over and over and over again as the common trait to successful urban environments.

Indeed, a proven fact is that downtowns are successful when they get people out of their car and walking up and down the various streets (in fact, this is one of the things that mall operators gleaned from successful downtowns). A downtown where pedestrians park in front of the store or, worse still, use a drive through is bound to fail.

That's not an opinion, again, its a proven fact. Montgomery is a case study for that.

However, to get people to walk, you must have a safe, comfortable, and interesting streetfront. Lights, sounds, people into the night. If you don't, then the downtown says goodnight when the offices close.

The proposed RSA building completely fails in this respect, just like the other RSA projects. It does not attempt to interact with the street but rather pulls back and buries its retail uses (such as the Chik Fil-a at the Regions) in the bowels of the building.

A recipe that is proven to kill street life which, in turn, kills a downtown.

[hiijakd]

thanks chad for articulating that much better than i ever could. by the way, i need to talk with you about some smart code details to make sure i am going to go about my projects the right way. this is byron berry by the way.

[Chad Emerson]

No problem at all. Just email me at chaddemerson@gmail.com or call me at 386.7536.

[bystander1]

Originally Posted by Brown Duckz

I'm really up in arms on this issue... I don't quite understand the term suburban office building? Is it the design? Like there won't be a public entrance on the street level or something? What makes this a suburban office building, but the Renaissance hotel not a suburban hotel? Also.. it's no where near the final stages of planning. I'm sure there is time and room for improvement and/or change.

I'll tell you the only beef I have with RSA's newest projects downtown...

RSA HQ= $150M+ * 9 stories
RSA Hotel (Renaissance)= $90M+ * 12 stories
RSA Dexter Ave. office building= $200M * 12 stories

Com'on Bronner, for $200M, GIVE US SOME HEIGHT!

Here's an idea. "Pull back" the new building from over the old judicial building and double the height of the new building that connects to it along the Monroe Street side. Then most of the exterior of the old judicial building can remain exposed and be renovated to serve as the main entrance to the new building.

Doubling the height of the connecting office building to 24 floors will keep the amount of office space roughly the same (about 500,000 sq ft). This makes it more feasible to cover the cost of renovating the judicial building, and at the same time preserve the view looking up Dexter Avenue, and truly give RSA the opportunity to create the city's new signature tower.

I know construction costs have skyrocketed, but can't RSA give us some height to equalize the skyline more? They like talking about how their buildings alter the city's skyline but you can hardly see them from a distance (except for RSA Tower).

[Chad Emerson]

I won't harp on this too much but tall buildings are absolutely the wrong thing for a city the size of Montgomery.

The reason is that Montgomery has a very finite demand for office space yet it has a fairly widespread downtown (primarily because it actually started as two separate cities).

If you build a new 12 story building, that will suck alot of the finite demand vertically into a single building rather than disperse that demand across the downtown footprint.

The resulting problem is that large blocks remain deserted because so much of the demand is vertically drawn into 2 or 3 tall building versus 12 or 13 mid sized buildings. Unlike, say, Chicago or Manhattan where there is plenty of demand to fill many tall buildings.

Consider what's happening in Mobile where the new "tall" RSA building has actually hurt demand in much of the rest of downtown because, like Montgomery, Mobile has a very finite demand for urban office space.

Alternatively, compare that to Charleston and Savannah, two Southern cities considered to possess highly desirable downtowns. They have very few tall buildings--the "skyline" is filled with little more than 8 story buildings.

But, their street life--the key factor in whether a downtown lives or dies past M-F office hours--is full of activity of many types. Retail. Dining. Coffee shops. Pubs. You name it, those places have a vibrant city center that most would covet.

In the end, successful mid-sized cities (Alexandria, Virginia is another example) share something in common: they trade skylines for street life.

The failure of our downtown's tallest RSA building to spark a revitalization throughout the city is our own proof in that pudding.

Indeed, consider the one building that has really drawn Montgomerians from all ages, demographics, and parts of the city: the Biscuits stadium.

It isn't visually imposing. It doesn't create a skyline. In fact, unless you are near it, you probably would not know its there. And you certainly can't see it from either of interstates or even Dexter Avenue. Yet, its pedestrian-friendly scale is immensely welcoming.

Great lessons to be learned there.

[Capital Heights]

Allright. I am just about convinced that the proposed building is poorly designed. I think it is probably too late to due anything about the basic configuration. Perhaps there is some hope to modify the street level features to render the building more pedestrian friendly.

One thing is certain: griping about the building on this forum is not sufficient action to change the builiding. Someone must organize the opposition and actually do something.

Any takers?

[hiijakd]

if i was good at organization i would say yes, but my strength is in carrying out plans. i am in for anyone that knows what we can do. public outcry got bronner to change the battlehouse so maybe we can get the same here.

[BlessedMobile]

Bronner did most of the interior WITHOUT the look desired by the Architectural Review Board . He will agree to whatever you want and DO whatever he wants. The inside of the Battle House looks nothing like the Old South or the original look. The marketing brochures done before the building was completed had illustrations showing all the old look and pastel colors; the actual finished look is bright colored carpet with funky designs. We appreciate RSA spending their money down here and love the look of the RSA Tower and the Battle House generally, but if you want that money you have to allow him his wishes. Money does more than talk...it rules!

[Chad Emerson]

I certainly agree that efforts to address this shouldn't be limited to only posting on this message board (though, I suspect more than just the posters are reading this thread these days).

Letters to the Editors that are calm and based in facts are a great start. More CG images of how the proposed building would oversize the entire street and capitol grounds would also be useful.

[Capital Heights]

A public relations offensive is certainly part of the equation....I think that someone of authority on the subject should request an audience with Dr. Bronner to express our concerns in a non-combative manner.

[hiijakd]

i bet we could get someone to digitally superimpose a glass encasement around the capital building with a 12 story tower over it. it would save the capital building and we could generate profits by renting out the space. it would be neat to have an all glass walkway so you could look down on the top of the flagpole. i think that should be the wave of the future. encase everything in glass just like an insect display.
ok...enough sarcasm.
perhaps we can get someone to sit and talk with him, an organization i belong to is having a meeting monday to elect a spokesperson to be able to address the concerns in a mature and kind manner.

[Capital Heights]

Those of us who care have a responsibilty to be stewards of arguably the most historic and important street in the state. Perhaps all the different groups who care should try to meet and join forces. I do think we should refrain from sarcasm and hyperbole and not force people into a defensive posture while there remains a chance to positively enfluence the building.

[Chad Emerson]

"If there is some little lady who can't see the Capitol from Dexter Avenue, I don't care," he told the Montgomery Lions Club."

In his Montgomery Advertiser article, Cosby Woodruff attributed this quote to the head of RSA related to the opposition to the proposed RSA building plans.

I sincerely hope that this is an innocent misquote or out of context statement. If not, it represents one of the most unfortunate statements that I have seen and is wrong in two respects.

First, it is not just "some little lady" who is concerned and opposed. Rather, I have spoken to a wide variety of opponents. From elected officials to everyday concerned citizens. Indeed, when the issue is explained--and the proposed images shown--almost everyone I have spoke with understands the problem.

Second, RSA should care if people are concerned that a project will visually overwhelm the state capitol (and, for that matter, Dexter Avenue Baptist Church). Indeed, everyone should care as the State Capitol and the history of our state it represents is bigger and more important than any single project regardless of the developer.

RSA should be applauded for things like the Robert Trent Jones Golf Trail and its various resort properties throughout Alabama. They have been successful for both the company and the state.

However, despite their investment of millions of dollars over the last decades in downtown Montgomery, the city's downtown has not improved in any meaningful way. It is still pretty much an 8am to 5pm place for offices.

Surely the strategic decision makers at RSA can recognize this and make some very reasonable changes to this proposed project to--at the very least--give it a chance to help the entire downtown and Dexter Ave area.

If anyone has any connections with RSA and its architects, I am willling to meet with them (as are several others) and suggest some reasonable revisions to the plan that have been proven in city after city to make the project viable for both the developer and the downtown.

I can always be reached at chaddemerson@gmail.com.

[Brown Duckz]

RSA should spend some money now and try to get that entertainment district going while we wait for the opening of the hotel/convention center. Just a thought.

[EXbubba]

It seems to me that a page could be taken from London, Paris and Rome when ti comes to development of any cityscape. I agree with Chad and would more like have proposed nothing higher than five floors along Dexter, while building up Commerce and Montgomery and Court Streets. One must have foot traffic to build up any given area anywhere. Montgomery has the historical attractions but lacks the necessary retail which usually follows people living in areas with money to spend. Key being money to spend....like young people in apts and lofts, either old, reconditioned or new, but on a human scale. As I was reading the Wash Post yesterday, it was truly incredible that a portion of DC with 70K plus people have just gotten their first grocery store in 20 years - due in large part to concentrated poverty. As I remember there is a significant population living near downtown MGM, but not significant in spending power. Get the singles to move to the area and the entertainment and retail will follow their disposable income.

[Capital Heights]

It seems to me that the footprint and heights of the proposed building are too far along to reasonably expect to change. Perhaps we can encourage RSA to change the street level characteristic of the building. Further, we should consider the suggested height restriction on Dexter from Hull Street to Court Street. Thus allowing capitol complex buildings to exceed the five-story limit and simultaneously protect the remaining old buildings along lower Dexter Avenue. Finally, as a mitigation perhaps we can encourage RSA to develop five-story in fill at the parking structure at Dexter between Perry and Lawrence. This is the site that Dover Kohl indicated would be ideal for ground floor retail and offices on upper floors.

[hiijakd]

chad, i know a girl that works for 2WR and could possibly be an in for us. i definitely think something has to be done. regardless of how far along the plans are it just isn't right for the area. from what i have heard, and this may just be rumor so take it at that, bronner has been approached about the infill around the parking deck and wasn't at all interested.
i would be willing to host a meeting at my loft if someone could put it together. if we could get bronner to show we could illustrate the possibilities of proportional infill and development. any takers on organizing a meeting?

[bystander1]

Originally Posted by BlessedMobile

...He will agree to whatever you want and DO whatever he wants...We appreciate RSA spending their money down here and love the look of the RSA Tower and the Battle House generally, but if you want that money you have to allow him his wishes. Money does more than talk...it rules!

Yes, we already know... Remember, he built here first...and often.